So why did Islamic philosophy not recover after The Mongol invasion? You'd think in 19th...

So why did Islamic philosophy not recover after The Mongol invasion? You'd think in 19th, 20th century where Arabs had a resurgence would give us new philosophies or ideas.

Instead we got Wahabbists scum regressing everything with no modernity or any achievement.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=bx8QeXmit2A&list=PL86BB38FC895633B5&index=6
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>you will never see neo-sufism dominating the world's metaphysic

fuck mongol amirite

Conquest was needed for Islam to survive and flourish.The Muslim overlords acquired the non-muslims wealth in the form of jizya, dispossession and as slaves to fund their wars and standard of living.

But over time this diminished,So basically after 2-3 centuries after conquest Islam effectively becomes a very regressive stifling culture that produces little of worth.

Ottoman autism.

This sounds pretty simplistic and it only addresses conquests. Abbasid era put economic support to translate texts and find discoveries. Captured people can also convert and ascend to higher positions in the empire as well.

Am I mistaken about this?

Muslims thought that the Mongol Invasion was God’s retribution towards the Muslims for researching into science

The Mongols have nothing with the Arabs' failure.

The Early Arabs were educated by Coptic theologians who were Aristotelian, this Artistotelian-Coptic doctrine developed into Arab science, but later on and under Byzantine/Persian/Indian influence, the Arabs shifted towards Platonism, and just like the Jews and the Greeks they turned their society into a deeply religious society but of little worth when it comes to scientific achievements.

If an Arabic version of Thomas of Aquinas had arisen among the Arabs, they would be on par with the West.

I don't know, the Ismailis are pretty influent in the West.

>Early Arabs were educated by Coptic theologians
From where did you get this?

Considering that Alexandria was the greatest Aristotelian School at that times, and Avicenna had Alexandrian commentaries of Aristotle, it is obvious that Arabs acquiered their knowledge of Aristotle from the Copts.

>Avicenna

Averroes*

But where was the Abbasid capital?

youtube.com/watch?v=bx8QeXmit2A&list=PL86BB38FC895633B5&index=6

Oh, what could have been

Where's your source?

Yeah but pre islam werent very educated

About what ?

Averroes being influenced by Alexandrian Aristotelianism ? Or Early Arabs being Aristotalians ?

Because their Turkish successors couldn't into philosophy.

This but unironically

>expecting quality philosophy out of people who believe in hebrew mythology

Which book is that from? Sounds interesting

>You'd think in 19th, 20th century where Arabs had a resurgence would give us new philosophies or ideas.

But there were plenty of new philosophical developments in the Arab world during the last century, you just don’t know about them because you are a pleb.

Arabic Thought and Its Place in History

The Islamic world exhausted its creative possibilities during what has been termed its golden age. It largely followed the thinking of Al-Ghazali afterwards, who was opposed to philosophy (even of a reshashed sort).

"Modernity" as is commonly understood is a purely Western creation. The Middle-East has imitated the West in some regards, though, and has used Averroes (who wrote against Al-Ghazali) to justify this on occasion.

The decline of the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates. Both focused on supporting culture literature science, philosophy all that good stuff only for petty kings and warlords to break off and just fuck around. At best you'd get some guys who'd pull together the fragments enough to be an economic military power in the regions of Islam but they never got the spark back.